cancer studies - a croc ?

Everyone should know the medical profession likes to make money. Extensive heart operations and cancer have been 2 of their biggest money makers. Hospitals resisted the simpler, less invasive heart procedures for years. The medical profession is competent...but greedy.


Tons of cancer research studies find possible causes of cancer.....but tons of those give doses of the causing agent at levels no one will ever see. 300, 400 times a standard amount....even 1,000 times exposure. Of course that will wreak havoc in your body.....the lab rats don't stand a chance. Coca cola given in those amounts will destroy your body.


Are these studies a money making croc ?

i have read a shit ton of medial studies lately. for every study that says to take this or that out of your diet or something causes cancer, there is another one that contradicts it and says the opposite. the ones making money are the ones publishing the studies, especially if they are selling or pushing some product or lifestyle, etc.

It depends on if you have cancer or heart issues ... then the research is not a croc.

I was in a cancer research study for 5 years at MD Anderson.
I thought it was a good thing...still do.

Croc?


I think not. Crocodiles don't get cancer.

i have read a shit ton of medial studies lately. for every study that says to take this or that out of your diet or something causes cancer, there is another one that contradicts it and says the opposite. the ones making money are the ones publishing the studies, especially if they are selling or pushing some product or lifestyle, etc. Originally Posted by aznlvr11

Yep, eggs are bad for you then they're a super food. I heard some stupid study the other day that said grilling or broiling meat(meaning at high temps) is bad for you somehow. Well, how the fuck am I supposed to cook it now? Deep fry it? Cuz we know that smoking it increases levels of nitrates or nitrites or some such shit.


These studies come out of research hospitals and labs and schools. They get grants, either private or public money, and some kind of determination is expected so the grantee gives them one. You can manipulate data any way you want. Mark Twain said there are three types of lies...lies, damn lies, and statistics. The world of medical studies lives in the latter where they can manipulate the statistics to affect an outcome.



It's really simple, just follow the money.

I had a golf buddy who did lab cancer research at MD Anderson - hairiest guy I have ever seen - some kind of creature. Only time he couldn't make a golf date......was when it was time to do grant writing. Eventually he left to rebuild houses.

His salary at MD Anderson was well over $ 100k. In fact, if you look at the salary list of MD Anderson, the list is almost endless with people drawing $ 200 to 300k salaries.

There are a hell of a lot less headaches for a research Dr. than one practicing especially private research. He only has to answer to the people paying him. A Dr. in a practice has to answer to all the regulations that the Gov't has put into place like ACA and other restrictive legislation.

Teaching is another good place. I have two cousins on the west coast who have PhD and MDs. Neither of them practice. One is a neurology professor at a major university with a huge hospital system like UT has and the other is involved in some kind of genetic and cancer research. I can't talk to either one of them. They think on a different level but can't change a light bulb.

The saddest part may be the 18 point font bold headlines reading "Product xyz may cause cancer", or "chemical abc linked to cancer".

It's only when you get to the fine print of the research study where you learn doses or amounts of 300 times ever received during a lifetime is shown to cause it.

Fake news ? Maybe....or the next thing to it.

Cancer is hereditary in lab rats...

Maybe that's why I got it

No diseases can survive in an alkaline body... Food for thought

I like your pic CB